3-4 Defense in the NFL...Article by John Clayton on ESPN.com

[DiegoCane]

The 3-4 doesn't have to be run the way we run it. (i.e big, slow D-linemen 2-gapping)

There's teams that run speed-based 3-4's and they use lighter players. I believe I saw an article about Oklahoma doing this. They have some stud outside linebacker who's about 230lbs and reeks havoc. (Name is slipping my mind)

This.

Their is nothing wrong with a 3-4, there is something wrong with the way we try to run it at Miami. Square peg, round hole.

 

[Dynasty]

Favorite quote from TCU article:

"In true Miami 4-3 defense fashion, the Frogs are looking to put as much speed on the field as possible. They adhere to a "shrink the field" philosophy of finding personnel. They recruit with the main purpose of locating speedy athletes with potential, rather than finished products with years of experience at a particular position."

Painful.

It is extremely painful. Although the modern day 40 defense that JJ unleased on the football world started out at Oklahoma, it's rightful birthplace is Coral Gables. That's really the painful part about all this. Of all places we run something totally opposite, anti-Miami.

 

[fivecent]

I think 4-2-5 would be interesting with the amount of athletic hybrid CB/Safety secondary talent in our backyard...assuming we recruit it.

Article about TCU's Defensive scheme. Patterson is a stud.

http://www.sbnation.com/college-foo...ense-strategy-formations-xs-os-gary-patterson

Patterson is a stud.

I'd break the bank to bring him to Coral Gables.

Funny you should say that, UM did just the opposite. According to Omar, UM tried to penny pinch Patterson which is why he isn't here. Unfvckingbelievable.

 

[Rellyrell]

The 3-4 is actually a very effective defense, IF you have the right mind running it. It can be disguised and flexed in to so many different formations and it's meant to be aggressive...NOT this patty cake bull. GB runs it and you see what your boy Clay Matthews do with it. The Texans run it and Mr. DPOY JJ Watt goes HAM in it. Unfortunately, we have Al Grohden running our scheme. I'm convinced if we ran a full 4-3, we still wouldn't get to the QB will Grohden running our Defense. Unfortunately, it is what it is.

 

[Miami Nights]

There have been many articles in the past explaining the why's of this transition to more 3-4s. The short answer without getting technical - it's better suited to defend the spread.

Not sure if I buy this. What's your reasoning behind this?

 

[tsimonitis]

I think 4-2-5 would be interesting with the amount of athletic hybrid CB/Safety secondary talent in our backyard...assuming we recruit it.

Article about TCU's Defensive scheme. Patterson is a stud.

http://www.sbnation.com/college-foo...ense-strategy-formations-xs-os-gary-patterson

Patterson is a stud.

I'd break the bank to bring him to Coral Gables.

Funny you should say that, UM did just the opposite. According to Omar, UM tried to penny pinch Patterson which is why he isn't here. Unfvckingbelievable.

Maybe we get a second chance...if Patterson learned anything this year it is that TCU can and will be ignored for the traditional powers

 

[AUcane]

There have been many articles in the past explaining the why's of this transition to more 3-4s. The short answer without getting technical - it's better suited to defend the spread.

Not sure if I buy this. What's your reasoning behind this?

You know, I don't recall specifically but the jist was that the 3-4 allows you to attack from different spots. I'm certainly not an Xs and Os nerd but I'm just posting that I've heard ex-NFLers talk about this issue.

 

[MedleyCane]

Lots of pretty impressive offensive minded college football coaches have switched to the 3-4.
Brian Kelly fired his DC at Cincy who was doing good because he wanted a 3-4.
You have other coaches like Harbaugh, Jimbo Fisher, Mark Richt, Petrino, Jeff Tedford (at Cal),
Gus Malzahn, Kevin Sumlin (at UH), June Jones and even defensive minded coaches such as
Tommy Turbeville and Randy Edsall.
Alot of it has to do with how it can be easier to match-up vs spread offenses when you have 4 LBs
working with the DBs.

 

[miamiphd]

IMO, to run the 3-4, you need a monster at nose tackle. Someone like Vince Wolfork who draws double and even triple team bloffers. You also need a freak on the edge who can be both a QB's worst nightmare at DE and an OLB that can seal the edge and drop into short coverage. Someone like Suggs or L.T. Without those superior athletes, the 4-3 is a better option.

 

[Coach Macho]

4-3 is a better defense for setting the edge in the run game and attacking the QB. People talk about not knowing where the 4th rusheer is coming from in the 3-4 but in the 4-3 if you teach your DL to run stunts you can confuse the O-line just as well. That is the biggest difference I see from our DL. in the 1990's and early 2000's our DL ran a ton of stunts. Sometimes this backfired but more often it kept the opponents O-line off balance and kept our LBers clean. Now a days all we see is bullrushes and gap control.

Not knowing where the 4th rusher is coming from is more problematic for an offense. The QB and OL are calling their protection based on the 4th rusher. If they wrongly identify the 4th rusher then they will often leave that player unblocked or he'll be matched up against the RB. Also, the OL doesn't know which way the D-line is going cause they're assigned head-up.

Ask any OL coach or any O-lineman what's harder to face, 4-3 (even front) or 3-4 (odd front), and he'll tell you 3-4.

 

[travis]

well i thought the whole point of the 3-4 was to have badass rush LB's and big boy DL's that eat blocks

 

[clg003]

Not to knock the OP, but I could honestly care less what the NFL is doing as far as 3-4, because it has little relevance to what college athletes (most of whom will never play pro) are able to do.

Some would think that selling a kid on being "NFL ready" would be a recruiting advantage.

 

[clg003]

I think 4-2-5 would be interesting with the amount of athletic hybrid CB/Safety secondary talent in our backyard...assuming we recruit it.

Article about TCU's Defensive scheme. Patterson is a stud.

http://www.sbnation.com/college-foo...ense-strategy-formations-xs-os-gary-patterson

Patterson is a stud.

I'd break the bank to bring him to Coral Gables.

Funny you should say that, UM did just the opposite. According to Omar, UM tried to penny pinch Patterson which is why he isn't here. Unfvckingbelievable.

Which is what will happen to every coach ever hired by a Shalala administration. Orange you glad she didnt hire another one?

 

[TheMatador]

Does anyone seriously believe that Miami's old defense with all that speed, aggression, disruption and penetration would not be able to crush today's spread like it did the option? JJ's old 4-3 is perfect for the spread and more importantly the hurry up. The defense stayed is base almost all the time and dared you to do anything to it. Two bears in the middle destroying the center of the pocket and crazed speed coming at your QB from everywhere else will disrupt any offense. "Meet me at the QB and tackle the run on the way" does not require much time to call on defense. The hurry up is what give Saban fits because his system is complicated and slow. JJ's was simple and fast. Our old fast LBs are the perfect answer to the spread. Remember when Houston came in to OB with, I think Klinger or someone at QB? They were hanging 60 points on everyone. When Darin Smith, LB, covered their fastest WR the Houston coach said he knew it was not going to be a good night. We crushed what was basically a hurry up spread offense. You do need a pair of quick 300 plus lb DTs but everywhere else is speed and tackling.

The 3-4 actually started with Shula's Dolphins' 53 defense. Other teams picked it up from their. If worked well for The Big Tuna because he had LT. What defense would not have worked with that drugged crazed beast in it?

Or did it really start with the old "Okie" 5-2, the same defense we used to win our first NC? That was a 2-gap read-and-react defense, as I recall.

From wikipedia:

The 5-2 Oklahoma, with defensive ends given the ability to drop back into pass coverage,[13] is indistinguishable from the pro 3-4 defense. It should not come as a surprise then that coaches from Oklahoma (Chuck Fairbanks) and Oklahoma State (Bum Phillips) were among the first to introduce the 3-4 into the NFL.[14]

The 5-2 (or 5-4, or 3-4, or Okie, or 50 defense) is a popular defense at all levels of coaching, in part because it has simple reads, is easy to coach, and allows coaches to concentrate on technique.[15] By the 1990s, however, coaches were having issues with the demands of finding players who could handle the nose guard and defensive tackle positions of this defense. These require "two gap" players of exceptional size and power.[16] Further, the "read then react" nature of the defense made it doubly difficult for teams of smaller size.[17] As a consequence, teams began switching back to more modern four man line defenses, of the kind pioneered by the Miami Hurricanes of college football and the Jimmy Johnson led Dallas Cowboys.[18]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5%E2%80%932_defense

 

[TheMatador]

Favorite quote from TCU article:

"In true Miami 4-3 defense fashion, the Frogs are looking to put as much speed on the field as possible. They adhere to a "shrink the field" philosophy of finding personnel. They recruit with the main purpose of locating speedy athletes with potential, rather than finished products with years of experience at a particular position."

Painful.

Interesting quote, and that fit in with JJ's approach to recruiting--he looked for athletes, he didn't care about rankings. He was confident he could develop them. The same with one of the coaches I spoke to years ago on Erickson's staff (Karmelowicz--DL). He wanted the raw material. a player with certain dimensions for DL. He would coach them into players.

 

[TheMatador]

4-3 is a better defense for setting the edge in the run game and attacking the QB. People talk about not knowing where the 4th rusheer is coming from in the 3-4 but in the 4-3 if you teach your DL to run stunts you can confuse the O-line just as well. That is the biggest difference I see from our DL. in the 1990's and early 2000's our DL ran a ton of stunts. Sometimes this backfired but more often it kept the opponents O-line off balance and kept our LBers clean. Now a days all we see is bullrushes and gap control.

Not knowing where the 4th rusher is coming from is more problematic for an offense. The QB and OL are calling their protection based on the 4th rusher. If they wrongly identify the 4th rusher then they will often leave that player unblocked or he'll be matched up against the RB. Also, the OL doesn't know which way the D-line is going cause they're assigned head-up.

Ask any OL coach or any O-lineman what's harder to face, 4-3 (even front) or 3-4 (odd front), and he'll tell you 3-4.

Interesting. When the new Redskin coach came in last year, Gruden, there was a quote by him in the Washington Post that he would go with a 3-4 because he believed it was so effective when he faced it.

 

[Cane Dynasty]

4-3 is a better defense for setting the edge in the run game and attacking the QB. People talk about not knowing where the 4th rusheer is coming from in the 3-4 but in the 4-3 if you teach your DL to run stunts you can confuse the O-line just as well. That is the biggest difference I see from our DL. in the 1990's and early 2000's our DL ran a ton of stunts. Sometimes this backfired but more often it kept the opponents O-line off balance and kept our LBers clean. Now a days all we see is bullrushes and gap control.

Not knowing where the 4th rusher is coming from is more problematic for an offense. The QB and OL are calling their protection based on the 4th rusher. If they wrongly identify the 4th rusher then they will often leave that player unblocked or he'll be matched up against the RB. Also, the OL doesn't know which way the D-line is going cause they're assigned head-up.

Ask any OL coach or any O-lineman what's harder to face, 4-3 (even front) or 3-4 (odd front), and he'll tell you 3-4.

The real question to be asked is, would any OL coach or O-lineman rather face the Al Gorlden 3-4 or the Jimmy Johnson 4-3?

 

[Dynasty]

Does anyone seriously believe that Miami's old defense with all that speed, aggression, disruption and penetration would not be able to crush today's spread like it did the option? JJ's old 4-3 is perfect for the spread and more importantly the hurry up. The defense stayed is base almost all the time and dared you to do anything to it. Two bears in the middle destroying the center of the pocket and crazed speed coming at your QB from everywhere else will disrupt any offense. "Meet me at the QB and tackle the run on the way" does not require much time to call on defense. The hurry up is what give Saban fits because his system is complicated and slow. JJ's was simple and fast. Our old fast LBs are the perfect answer to the spread. Remember when Houston came in to OB with, I think Klinger or someone at QB? They were hanging 60 points on everyone. When Darin Smith, LB, covered their fastest WR the Houston coach said he knew it was not going to be a good night. We crushed what was basically a hurry up spread offense. You do need a pair of quick 300 plus lb DTs but everywhere else is speed and tackling.

The 3-4 actually started with Shula's Dolphins' 53 defense. Other teams picked it up from their. If worked well for The Big Tuna because he had LT. What defense would not have worked with that drugged crazed beast in it?

Or did it really start with the old "Okie" 5-2, the same defense we used to win our first NC? That was a 2-gap read-and-react defense, as I recall.

From wikipedia:

The 5-2 Oklahoma, with defensive ends given the ability to drop back into pass coverage,[13] is indistinguishable from the pro 3-4 defense. It should not come as a surprise then that coaches from Oklahoma (Chuck Fairbanks) and Oklahoma State (Bum Phillips) were among the first to introduce the 3-4 into the NFL.[14]

The 5-2 (or 5-4, or 3-4, or Okie, or 50 defense) is a popular defense at all levels of coaching, in part because it has simple reads, is easy to coach, and allows coaches to concentrate on technique.[15] By the 1990s, however, coaches were having issues with the demands of finding players who could handle the nose guard and defensive tackle positions of this defense. These require "two gap" players of exceptional size and power.[16] Further, the "read then react" nature of the defense made it doubly difficult for teams of smaller size.[17] As a consequence, teams began switching back to more modern four man line defenses, of the kind pioneered by the Miami Hurricanes of college football and the Jimmy Johnson led Dallas Cowboys.[18]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5%E2%80%932_defense

Excellent post, Matador.

I'm not sure if we ran a "true" 34 defense in '83. True 34 as defined by John Madden as the double bubble, two gap defense. Many folks credit former Dolphins defense coordinator Bill Arnsparger as an innovator of the 3-4. The no name and later killer bees defenses were aggressive, opportunistic units. IMO, I think Arnsparger's defensive philosophy would be classified more along the lines of Bum and Wade Phillips. Jim Mora's too. Arnsparger of course being the godfather. Again, I'm not completely sure if it was a 2 gap system, but Howard was part of Shula's staff in Baltimore and Miami. And Arnsparger coordinated both defenses, iirc.

Everyone is aware that Howard installed the pro passing system after accepting the job at UM, but there is very little known about the defense. One of brother played under Howard for two years. The next time we get together I will ask him about the specifics of that defense. Granted his last year was '80, so there might have been some tweaks after he left. In any event, excellent point about our first NC defense. I'm truly interested in knowing what influenced its structure and philosophy. Lots of possible variables...from the Bear to Shula.